Like my book, "Into the Mystic (From the Streets of Brooklyn)," this blog is devoted to discussions of "The Mystic" -- that expanded state of awareness where we connect with Spirit and experience other realities. As Spirit brought me to 9/11 Trtuh, discussions of what really happened on 9/11, and related deep events, are also covered.

Monday, October 10, 2016

Brilliant, Educational, and Enlightening--A Review of David Ray Griffin’s Book, "God Exists But Gawd Does Not"

Even
before reading David Ray Griffin’s God
Exists But Gawd Does Not, I realized that this book—apparently targeted mainly
to theologians and philosophers (of which I am neither)—would be way over my
head, intellectually speaking.As it
turned out, I was right.Nevertheless, I
very much enjoyed reading this brilliant work which opened my eyes and mind to the
varied perspectives expressed over the centuries, and to date, about the entity
known as “God.”

Professor
Griffin has a careful way of explaining things, and his analytical approach is brilliant,
as is true here and with regard to other books of his that I have read. In this
instance, I especially appreciated how the author breaks down each chapter into
separate subsets, provides smooth transitions, and offers clear explanations as
to what his positions are regarding the numerous controversies at issue.He also has an excellent way of breaking down
complex topics so that even those of us who are not theologians or philosophers,
can understand and enjoy this work.

I
also very much respect how Professor Griffin presents the positions of others
with whom he does not agree, in a fair and professional manner. Often, I
couldn’t tell until a presentation about the writings of “X” or “Y” was completed,
whether Professor Griffin agreed or disagreed with the opinions being
presented.So fair and objective is he.

Further,
the author’s “Conclusions” at the end of each chapter let the reader know in no
uncertain terms, exactly where Professor Griffin stands on the topics at issue.While I do not always agree with the author’s
positions, his incredibly insightful analysis has inspired me to further research
the subjects discussed, and the questions they trigger, thereby advancing my
own knowledge.

The
book begins with the author agreeing with atheists, that the world in which we
live was not created by an omnipotent being—such as the “God” of the Old Testament,
who would be called “Gawd,” a term that is defined as “the omnipotent creator
of the universe as portrayed by traditional theism.” (Page 1)The second part of the book argues that,
nevertheless, God (vs. Gawd) does exist, and that it is “important for
individuals and societies to believe that our world has been brought forth by a
divine creator.” (Preface)

Chapter
1, entitled “Evil,” raised a number of issues for me, more than any other
chapter in the book, by far.Here, Professor
Griffin focuses on the “logical problem of evil,” i.e., the idea that, if there
is both an “all-good and all-powerful” god, then evil should not exist. (Page
15) I have a basic problem with this
problem.Specifically, how on earth did all
of the brilliant minds referenced in this chapter come to theorize that “God” could
be “all-good?” For, isn’t this biblical “God” the same entity who decided to
inflict on all women, very severe pains while bearing children, simply because
Eve took a bite out of an apple?(Genesis 2:4-3:24)Isn’t the “God” of the Old Testament the same
entity that cast a plague that killed 70,000 men just
because David ordered a census of the people? (1 Chronicles 21) Didn’t this
same entity arrange for the destruction of 60 cities, while prompting the
killing of all the men, women, and children of each city, and the looting of
all of their value? (Deuteronomy 3) Isn’t this the same “God” who led Joshua to
destroy every living thing in
Jericho—men and women, young and old, along with all the cattle, sheep and
donkeys? (Joshua 6) Etc., etc.

I submit that if the “God” of the Old Testament did create the world, it
would be as insane and unjust a place as it is today.Witness (to name but one example): the mass
murders on 9/11 which were, at a minimum, aided and abetted by members of the U.S.
government, and which prompted the ongoing and endless “war of terror” [sic, my term], and the
resultant deaths, injuries, and sufferings of hundreds of thousands if not
millions of innocent people (still counting). So, in contrast to the author’s
viewpoint (and somewhat in sync with early Gnostic teachings which identify the
“God” of the Old Testament as the evil “Demiurge”), I would not rule out the idea
that the creator of this world is Gawd.

At
the end of Chapter 1, Professor Griffin concludes, “If the world is said to
have been created ex nihilo [out of
nothing], then the defense of the creator’s goodness will be impossible.” (Pages
38 and 39) But as evidenced in the writings of the Old Testament (examples
provided above), the defense of Gawd’s alleged “goodness” fails whether or not
he created the world, and whether or not he created the world out of nothing. Thus, I don’t really understand why
theologians and philosophers have persisted in this discussion for centuries on
end.

Another
problem I had with Chapter 1 has to do with the shamanic idea that God (vs. Gawd)
may have created this “evil” world (if you want to call it that, as some
Gnostics have) as a most challenging “school” for souls to attend (via their
own free will), and hopefully progress by standing up to evil in defense of
humanity.This idea springs from my
hearing renowned shamanic teacher Hank Wesselman say that Earth is known
throughout the galaxies as “a very tough learning school.”If so, Earth may be a place where evil is designed
(or at least allowed) to be in control, and where good souls can freely choose
to incarnate and strive to make a difference, against all odds; and as a result
of their dedication to Truth and the betterment of humanity, thereby progress
spiritually.In other words, one could
argue that the creation of this “evil” world may have been God’s way of setting
up an ultimate challenge for all those souls who choose to incarnate as human here,
to provide them with an opportunity to achieve soul growth at an accelerated
rate, and thereby become more “God-like” sooner rather than later.

Chapter
2 focuses on “scientific naturalism,” which is the doctrine that “there are no
supernatural interruptions of the world’s normal cause-effect relations.” (Page
44) In other words, God does not
intervene in the goings-on of man.This
chapter involves not only an analysis of the “Hermetic Tradition,” but also the
views of Descartes, Robert Boyle, and Isaac Newton.It’s a fascinating discussion.In his conclusion, the author asserts that
“the scientific worldview now rules out Gawd…however, God is compatible with
scientific naturalism—as long as it is not the sensationalist and materialistic
version of naturalism.”(Page 57)

In
Chapter 3, Professor Griffin deals with evolution as a main reason for
atheism.This, of course, involves a
detailed discussion of Charles Darwin.The author delves into issues like “Evolution vs. Gawd,” “Darwinian and
Neo-Darwinian Evolution,” “Are Gawd and
Evolution Compatible?” and (as a subset), “Intelligent Design.” It’s an intriguing read.

Unlike the first three chapters, which
discuss anti-theistic arguments, Chapters 4 and 5 discuss arguments for the
existence of Gawd. Specifically, Chapter
4 deals with “Consciousness,” and Chapter 5—my favorite chapter in the book—analyzes
“Miracles.”

The
reason why I enjoyed Chapter 5 so much is because Professor Griffin dares to focus
on “The Importance of Psychical Research,” “Parapsychology vs. Supernatural
Miracles,” and “Apparitions and the Resurrection Appearances of Jesus.”One must read Professor Griffin’s analysis
to fully appreciate his conclusion at the end of Chapter 5 that “the New
Testament’s ‘miracles’ were actual but not supernatural,” and that “The
discipline called psychical research or parapsychology has provided empirical
support” for this view. (Page 113)

“Immoral
Effects” is the title of Chapter 6, and presents the idea that “The so-called
New Atheists…have provided a restatement of the claim that theistic religion
promotes immorality, so that atheism would improve morality.” (Page 119)There seemed to me to be, in this chapter, an
appropriate opportunity for Professor Griffin to delve into 9/11 truth, given the
references to Sam Harris’ “The End of Faith,” written in the wake of 9/11, and
the discussion of the mainstream-manufactured (my term) “Islamophobia.”However, Professor Griffin, the author of a
dozen fabulous books on 9/11 Truth, chooses not to go there.Perhaps that is all for the best, given to
whom this book is apparently directed, i.e., theologians and philosophers.

Chapter
7, on “Mathematics,” begins Part II of the book, which in turn is entitled “Why
God Does Exist.”Chapter 7, for the most
part, was totally beyond my comprehension, though I was excellent at math from
grammar school thru college.

After
delving into the depths of math, Professor Griffin concludes, “Mathematics
points to the existence of God, understood as the mind or soul of the universe,
in four ways.” (Page 170)Four ways
which I won’t go into here, but which the mathematically inclined, I’m sure,
will very much appreciate.The phrase
describing God as “the mind or soul of the universe,” resonated strongly with
me.

The author’s thesis of Chapter 8, entitled
“Morality,” is that “an adequate moral philosophy is impossible without the
affirmation of a divine reality.” (Page 192)
Originally, I disagreed with this statement, since some of the most
“moral” people I’ve met are atheists. In
my view, one doesn’t need to believe in God to adhere to the so-called silver
rule: “Do not do unto others that which you would not have done unto you.” If we all followed that rule, the world would
be a better place, whether or not we believe in God. But after additional readings, it seems that “morality”
per se is not what Professor Griffin is getting at. Instead, the chapter is about “moral realism,” i.e., the position that
moral norms are real (or at least can be) in the nature of things (not simply
made up by us). This is a topic which, I
must confess, I find elusive.

Similarly, Chapter
9, on “Logic and Rationality,” is a chapter that is very much beyond me.However, I appreciate and tend to agree with
the conclusion reached at the end, that, “The present book, by speaking of a
world soul, describes a view of deity that is radically different from Gawd—a
deity that is not an omnipotent, supernatural being…”(Page 213)

“Truth,”
the title of Chapter 10, “is concerned with the existence of factual truth,
including historical truth, as pointing to the influence of the world on the
cosmic actuality…” (Page 216) As reference points, Professor Griffin asks, “Is
the standard account about the Pearl Harbor attack accurate? Was President
Kennedy really killed by Lee Harvey Oswald?Were the 9/11 attacks engineered by Muslims?With all such questions, we presuppose that
the answer is either true or false. Otherwise, there would be no debates about
them.” The author then goes on to define truth as “the correspondence of a
proposition with the reality to which it refers.” (Page 217)All this is a prelude to an in-depth
discussion of truth which leads Professor Griffin to conclude that “the
existence of factual truth should be added to the list—along with the existence
of mathematics, morality, logic, and rationality—of reasons for affirming the
reality of God.” (Page 227)

In
Chapter 11, Professor Griffin delves into the topic of “Religious
Experience.”Here, the author focuses on
“The Academic Study of Religion,” and ultimately concludes that, “if we think
in terms of a divine reality that is universal but not omnipotent in the
traditional sense, the reality of religious experience simply adds one more
reason to the list of reasons to believe in the existence of God.” (Page 240)As is true throughout this book, the joy is
in the reading and dissecting of the author’s own analyses that lead him to his
conclusions.

Professor
Griffin’s analyses in the last three chapters— “Metaphysical Order,”
“Cosmological Order,” and“Teleological
Order”—set forth more reasons to believe in the existence of God, if one is to
approach the subject from a purely intellectual perspective.

In
a subchapter entitled “Fine-Tuning Evidence For Gawd Or God,” Professor Griffin
advises that “scientists and others should do their best to avoid being unduly
influenced by their hopes, looking as dispassionately as possible at which alternative
has the best evidence.” (Page 292) Sound advice, to be sure. But I would argue
that there is no way to scientifically prove one way or the other whether Gawd
or God exists or doesn’t exist. Unlike, say, with regard to 9/11—where the laws
of physics demonstrate that Building 7 could not have collapsed as the
government says it did (i.e., as the result of office fires)—there is no
physical proof possible that can be evaluated to determine whether or not God
or Gawd exists, and/or created the planet Earth.It is seemingly more a matter of
metaphysics, or something even more intangible, involving rules which are quite
undeterminable, and perhaps even unimaginable. Perhaps as early Gnostics
believed, God is unknowable.

Toward
the end of the book, Professor Griffin addresses “Why Belief in God, Not Gawd,
Is Important.”Surprisingly, the
author’s focus is on “the overriding issue of our time: whether civilization
will be destroyed by global warming and the climate change it causes.” (Page
307) He goes on to say, “The central
difference between God and Gawd is that God is not in complete control.We humans exist only because God persuaded
the evolutionary process to bring forth higher forms of life, but to believe in
God as our creator is not to believe that our planet’s climate is controlled by
God.” (Page 315) I agree that it is up to humans to save the planet for human
habitation, but sadly, I don’t see that happening.I hope I’m wrong.

Professor
Griffin indicates that he “wrote this book with the hope that it would be the
best book on God ever written.”(Preface)
Having read no other books on this topic, I will leave that judgment primarily to
the theologians and philosophers to whom this work is apparently directed. From
my point of view, the book is brilliant, educational, and enlightening, and
well worth reading by anyone who has ever considered the seemingly unanswerable
question of, “Who is God?”